A Critical Review of Haiti Earthquake of 2010: Key Development ...

A Critical Review of Haiti Earthquake of 2010: KeyDevelopment Problems and Focused SolutionsHector MARTIN 1 , Timothy M. LEWIS 2 , and Nanika MORAIN MARTIN 31Lecturer, University of the West Indies,(St Augustine, Trinidad)hector.martin@sta.uwi.edu2Professor, University of the West Indies(St Augustine, Trinidad)timothy.lewis@sta.uwi.edu3 Director, M&M Dev. Co. Ltd.NRMB_10@hotmail.comIn the year 2010, natural disasters were at catastrophic levels leaving death, havoc, devastation anddisplacement in its wake; demonstrating the need for increased focus on disaster management. Integralto reducing this impact and a primary focus point to disaster management is the evaluation of risk andvulnerability. This paper presents a systematic evaluation of Haiti and examines the pressure andrelease (PAR) model in the context of the earthquake of 2010. An evaluation of the cause and effect ofthe disaster is also undertaken; which in turn predicted risk factors.The evaluation assumes that disasters are caused by the intersecting of two opposing forces: theprocess generated vulnerability, and physical exposure to hazards. Increasing pressure can come fromeither; it was shown that vulnerability has to be reduced to relieve the pressure. Vulnerability wasevaluated in three levels: root causes, dynamic pressures and unsafe conditions. The reverse of theprogression of vulnerability provided areas where solutions can be focus to improve safety.Keywords: disaster, vulnerability assessment, pressure and release model`1. INTRODUCTIONThe Caribbean, located at latitude 10-300 N is bombarded yearly by hurricane forces. In addition to itspeculiar location, it is bounded by tectonic plates which contribute to the occurrence of earthquakes,volcanoes, and tectonic tsunami. It is a fact that each year Caribbean countries are at risk to naturalhazards which results in significant losses and environmental damage. Charvériat (2000) estimated thatwithin Latin America and the Caribbean, damages from natural disaster have reached US$3.5 billionannually leaving a death toll of 45,000.Haiti is located in the northern region of the Caribbean. On January 12, 2010, the country was hit by a7.0 magnitude on the Richter scale earthquake, where 316,000 persons were killed and more than 9million affected (my web 2011). The impacts of this disaster resulted in the disruption of the society, withenvironmental effects that reshaped the entire landscape; leaving a trail of falling trees and accumulateddebris in need of collection, sorting, treatment, and disposal. Also, there were economic impacts ascatastrophic damage to infrastructure and abysmal property damage were severe and subsequently hindereconomic activity to the country. The social impacts of this disaster were loss of life, epidemics that leftmany communities disrupted and hundreds of thousands of people displaced. In comparison, Chile wasstruck by an earthquake magnitude 8.8 in February of the same year; more than 2 million people wereaffected and deaths totaled 708 persons (Xinhua 2010). More recently, March 2011 marked one of theworst earthquakes; to hit Japan in 140 years. This was a 9.0 magnitude earthquake which brought with it a- 33 -

tsunami killing 15,698 persons and 4,666 reported missing (Vervaeck and Daniell 2011). Of the threelocations, Haiti was impacted by the lowest magnitude earthquake but had the highest death toll and totalnumber affected; even though, the magnitude of the Chile earthquake was 700 times stronger than that ofthe Haiti earthquake. This is rather contrary to the notion that the damages should be greater as themagnitude increases, all being equal; but are all things equal? In addition, the Haiti earthquake was morethan twice as lethal as any previous magnitude-7.0 event (Bilha 2011). Our assessment must thereforeexamine these anomalies; in order to determine what the key contributors toward Haiti susceptibility toearthquake are.One of the principal challenges in the determination of susceptibility is the quantification of conditionsboth pre and post disaster. This was evident in the collection of reliable statistics of the total killed aswitnessed by the fact that estimates of this number ranged from (200- international (NYT 2012). Additionally, there was no nationaltracking system to monitor the movements (or the returns) of displaced persons throughout the country.The intended evaluation model for the identification of a solution for Haiti must therefore take thesechallenges into consideration.This report aims to critically evaluate vulnerability towards earthquake and recommendmeasures to reduce the probable future devastating impact. To achieve this aim, the pressure and release(PAR) model will be utilized to track the progression of vulnerability by addressing the underlying causesas issues, and analyzing the nature of hazards molded by a series of dynamic pressures. This leads to saferconditions which facilitate the preparation of the community to dealing with disasters. The PAR DisasterModel explains disaster from a macro perspective. It indicates how risk to disaster can be reduced byemploying preventative and mitigation actions.2. PAR MODEL AND VULNERABILITYRisk is a function of hazard and vulnerability. Wisner et al. (2007, Kindle Locations 1581-1583,)lamented that vulnerability refers to the potential for casualty, destruction, damage, disruption or otherform of loss in a particular element: risk combines this with the probable level of loss to be expected froma predictable magnitude of hazard (which can be considered as the manifestation of the agent thatproduces the loss). The key to understanding disaster is therefore an understanding of vulnerability.Blaikie, et al. (1994) defines vulnerability as the characteristics of a person or group in terms of theircapacity to anticipate, cope with, resist and recover from the impact of a disaster. In essence, vulnerabilityis the potential for loss and is the only identifiable attribute which can characterize a person or grouppre-disaster, during the event, and post disaster. In addition, vulnerability is time dependent to somedegree and can be measured in terms of the damage to future livelihoods and not just as what happens tolife and property at the time of the hazard event (Blaikie, et al. 1994).Therefore, any model which trulyaddresses disaster management must include vulnerability as its cornerstone. Vulnerability involves acombinatioa discrete and identifiable event in nature or in society (Blaikie, et al. 1994). It is the capacity to sufferharm and react adversely (Kates 1985). Timmerman (1981) emphasizes that the degree and quality of therecover from the event). Consequently, the prescriptive and normative response to vulnerability is toformulate a model which lessen exposure, enhance coping capacity, intensify recovery potential andaugment damage control by private and public means (Watts and Bohle 1993).The distinction of the type of disaster model to be utilized in a given scenario is more profound in itsefficacy when reacting to disasters with severe time constraints. Disaster management models can becategorized as: logical, integrated, causes, and others (Asghar et al 2006). The PAR model is classified asa causal model, since it is not based on the idea of defining stages in a disaster, but simplifies this processthrough the suggestion of some underlying causes of disasters through the analysis of the nature of the- 34 -

hazard. This simplification distinguishes a critical element in the assessment of the complex interactionsof the disaster stages; an essential criteria in the measurement of the usefulness of disaster models asnoted by Kelly (1998). Models which follow the rudimentary logic of the disaster management cycletruncate the process into discrete separable stages which is atypical of the actual unraveling of a disaster.The challenge arising from this truncation is to determine when each stage ends and when another begins.The PAR model overcomes these limitations through the focus on the pressure before, during and afterthe event without distinguishing each stage; hence, the processes of improvement conceived areimplemented continuously.The PAR model is used primarily to address social groups facing disaster events which emphasizedistinctions in vulnerability by different exposure units such as social class and ethnicity (Turner II et al.2003). The Haiti earthquake of 2010 and its impact on that country demonstrated the high vulnerability ofpeople in disaste The modelallows the community to identify such predisposing factors and correct them in order to reducevulnerability and the overall impact of natural hazards. Highlighting the vulnerability of countries tonatural disasters can serve to shed light on the issue, identify sectors of the economy or society that areparticularly at risk, and aid in planning to mitigate the effects of future events (Crowards 2000). Theusefulness of the PAR model was put into focus when Trobe and Venton (2003) noted:The underlying causes of disasters that construct risk and vulnerability. the widerdevelopment community should get involved in disaster risk reduction .....because of rootcauses, not just how to tackle the disaster when it happens. Therefore, to overcome a emphasis should be placed on highlighting the root causes ofdisasters such as poverty and other forms of vulnerability.The PAR model does not provide a detailed and theoretically informed analysis of the preciseinteractions of environment and society at the point when the event occurs (Wisner et al. 2004). While thePAR model does not quantify vulnerability in a manner in which it is relevant to the assessment andquantification of risk and is unable to address the occurrence of multiple hazards. It is a qualitativeassessment which has the advantage of identifying areas in need of further focus. Therefore, thischaracteristic will be further explored in the evaluation of Haiti to determine primary focus areas.3. THE CASE OF HAITIThe pressure and release model (see figure 1) shows the progression of vulnerability of the Haitiearthquake, the risk is crunched between the progression and the hazard. The primary impact was theearthquake but Haiti also experienced secondary impacts such as the cholera epidemic; which sickenednearly 500,000 persons across Haiti and killed nearly 7,000 (McNeil Jr. 2012). Tertiary impact includesviolent attacks as UN peacekeepers were suspected of introducing cholera.Critical unsafe conditions, dynamic pressures and root causes for the Haiti 2010 earthquake disasterwere obtained from secondary data sources and are presented below:Unsafe ConditionsUncontrolled illegal housing development in vulnerable areas such as hillsides and flood plains.Because of the low per capita GDP of $1,300 (CIA Fact Book 2011) people building homes have nooption but to build using the most affordable materials and the cheapest and quickest buildingmethods; which often prove to be unsuitable.- 35 -

Haitian roads (4,545 km in total) are in poor condition. Eighty percent of the paved roads and 96percent of the remaining primary roads require repair or rehabilitation (Archi 1995). These unpavedand poor roads result in limited access and also increase vehicle operating costs. In 1990 only 39 percent of the 5.9 million residents had adequate access to water and only 24 percentto sanitation (Us Army Corps of Engineers 1999). The lack of essential basic amenities such as wateror sanitation is outside the reach of government and public services and in 2012 this still poses achallenge to Haitis development.Dynamic PressuresThere is little or no urban planning in Port-au-Prince to control settlement development andregularization of rural poor immigrants into the city in need of a better way of life. There is a shortageof housing and those that exist are of poor quality (Oxfam 2010).agriculture policy fueled significant de-forestation and soildegradation that was the workings of sugar plantations.The government lacked the resources or the will to reverse this long-term man-made ecologicaldisaster. Farmers over-farmed the soil in order to make a bare subsidence and, in recent years, apopulation too poor to buy kerosene or bottle gas turned to forest-derived charcoal as their onlysource of cooking fuel.Root Causese sugar and60% of the coffee consumed in Europe. In 1791 the slaves of Haiti rebelled and, under the leadershipof slave- Haiti was forced to pay enormous reparations to France in return for diplomatic recognition. Toobtain the required amount of money Haiti borrowed extreme sums from the US, German and Frenchbanks (Oxfam 2010). This made Haiti a heavily indebted country.Haiti was to use force and occupation to ensurethat Haiti stuck to its repayment schedules (Oxfam 2010)9 million population lives below the poverty line of $2/day of which 54% in abjectpoverty; unemployment rate is 45% (CIA Fact Book 2012).The amplification of surface seismic waves crossing the soft sedimentary plains on which mostdwellings were constructed contributed to their collapse. Because of this, and the westwardpropagation of the rupture, damage was less on the bedrock hills south of the city, and far more on thecoastal plains near Léogane 30 kilometres to the west (Bilha 2011).Risk reduction is the purpose of hazard managers. Risk reduction will include some mechanism toreduce vulnerability. Vulnerability reduction may include changes to achieve safer conditions eitherdirectly or indirectly by reducing dynamic pressures and addressing root causes that result in unsafeconditions. Figure 2 illustrates how safety can be enhanced through the reduction of dynamic pressure androot cause. If we consider the Haiti 2010 earthquake and follow the chain of explanation that linksvulnerability to the specific physical trigger that creates a disaster, reversing the PAR model, starting with Some of theproposed safe conditions include:Structural Revision of Seismic Building Code and maps Retrofit of existing Buildings Training of best international practices, then, provide supervision for the construction of newBuildings- 36 -

Development of safer infrastructure and develop masonry as a locally appropriate constructiontechnologyNon-Structural Develop master urban plans with a bottom up approach to incorporate the views at thecommunity levels. Implement land-use planning and regulation including the compulsorypurchase of ruined tenements by government. Implement disaster preparedness planning at the local and community level4. CONCLUSIONCountries economic, social and political climate are severely affected after such destruction by anatural hazard. It often leaves the country exposed to other threats as seen in Haiti which experienced asevere outbreak of cholera after the earthquake devastation. While natural disasters have a lethalreputation, secondary effects such as, food shortage, genocide, illness, civil and political violence insome countries still count for the highest numbers of deaths. Even more devastating is the extent ofhuman suffering and displacement, which prevails long after the disaster has occurred, as exhibited by thenumber of persons living in camps in Haiti. In these instances it is often the poor who are most adverselyaffected.From this review it was found that the most critical factors contributing to Haiti high susceptibility toearthquake are: poor construction and materials, lack of planning and building regulations lack of awareness that earthquakes are a significant threat Abject povertyEmphasis must therefore be placed on improving these key areas and equitably distribute wealth, whichhas a history of political corruption.- 37 -

Progression of VulnerabilityRoot Causes Dynamic Pressures Unsafe Conditions Risk Hazard-Poverty (80% people living belowpoverty line, 54% live in abjectpoverty)-High death rate due AIDS/HIV,malaria, respiratory infections.-Lack of basic health care.-High exposure to infectiousdiseases-75% of Haiti household lackrunning water-Long history of political violence(32 coup).-Struggle for political power.-Education Adult Literacy: men54%; women 50% (Foreign andCommonwealth Office 2012)-Large slum city in capital-Densely populated areas-Extremely high food pricesIdeologies:History of corrupt politicalsystem and government.Corruption 168 of 180 countries(Transparency internationalLack of:-Seismograph stations.-Attention to earthquake resistance-Poor design and construction ofbuildings to possibility of earthquakes- Awareness that Haiti was vulnerableto earthquakes and other naturaldisasters.- Effective education systems-Disaster management systems.-Social support structuresMacro Forces:-Désertification-Deforestation-Large population-Migration-Between 1825 and 1947 Haiti wasforced to pay enormous reparations toFrance in return for diplomaticrecognition. To obtain the requiredamount of money Haiti borrowedextreme sums from US, German andFrench banks. This made it a heavilyindebted country.PhysicalEnvironment:-Poor construction practices-Poor marine and costalmanagement systems-Deforestation anddesertification-Flooding devastation in 2008-Over farming- Amplification of surfaceseismic waves crossing thesoft sedimentary plainsEconomic Environment:-Haiti is the poorest countryas per the HumanDevelopment Index;-Government corruption-GDP of 11.53 billion or 1,300per person.-Low income levels-30-40% foreign aid makes upgovernment budget.The depth of the Haitiearthquake was 6.2miles in depth below theearth surface whichcaused the energy to bereleased very close to thesurface. There wasground shaking thatlasted 30-40 seconds,several aftershocks alsofollowed periodicallymeasuring about 4.0 5.0 in magnitude. Totaldamages of theearthquake wasestimated between$8-$14 billionHaitiEarthquake7.0MagnitudeFig.1 The progression of vulnerability for earthquake hazards- 38 -

Progression of safetyAddress Root Causes Reduce Dynamic Pressures Achieve safe Condition Reduce HazardIncrease the access ofvulnerable groups to: Power Resources andstructureThrough thedemocratization ofgovernanceChallenge any: Ideology, economicsystem or politicalsystem thatincreasesvulnerability.Development of: Local community groups todemand effectivereconstruction. Local institution Training and education Enhanced legal framework forthe facilitation and regulationof international disaster aid. Ethical standards in publiclife Press freedomMacro Forces: Improve rural economicopportunities to reduceurbanization Re-forestation Develop and implementhealth programPhysicalEnvironment: Improve seismic buildingcodes and theirenforcement Reduce building densitiesby changing land usepattern. Provide incentives tostrengthen existingbuildings Diversify rural incomeopportunitiesResilient local economy: Strengthen livelihoodsPublic Actions: Improve disasterpreparedness andplanning. Through schoolReduceRiskImprove Seismichazard mappingAutomated posteventnotificationprogramsFig.2 Risk reduction mechanisms for Haiti- 39 -

5. REFERENCES1) Archi, R.K.: Emergency Economic Recovery Program. From the United Nations International Report, Vol. I, no. A1, 1995,Available at: http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/43a/050.html, Accessed March 2012.2) Asghar, S., Damminda A., and Leonid, C.: Comprehensive Conceptual Model for Disaster Management. 2006, Available at:http://reliefweb.int/organization/jha, Accessed March 2012.3) Bilha, R.: Lessons from the Haiti earthquake 2011, Available at:http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v463/n7283/full/463878a.html , Accessed March 20124) Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., Davis, I., and Wisner, B.: At Risk: Natural Hazards, ulnerability and Disasters. London:Routledge, 1994.5) Central Intelligence Agency (CIA): The world Fact Book. 2011, Available at:https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ha.html Accessed March 2012.6) Charvériat, C.: Natural Disasters in Latin America and the Caribbean: An Overview of Risk. Working Paper #434.Inter-American Development Bank: Washington, 2000.7) Crowards, T.: Comparative Vulnerabilities to Natural Disasters in the Caribbean, Paper presented at theOAS/USDE-NOAA/CSC on Workshop on Vulnerability Assessment Techniques, Charleston, South Carolina, 20-22. 2000.Available at:http://www.oas.org/cdmp/document/mitiplan/mitapend.pdf Accesses October 22, 2011.8) Disaster Assessment Portal: Techniques Used in Disaster Risk Assessment, Available at:http://www.disasterassessment.org/section.asp?id=4, Accessed on October 21, 2011.9) Foreign and Commonwealth Office, North & Central America and Caribbean: Haiti Country information. 2012. Available at:http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/travel-advice-by-country/country-profile/north-central-america/haiti/Accessed March 2012.10) Kates, R.W.: The Interaction of Climate and Society. New York: Wiley, 1985.11) Kelly, C.: Simplifying Disasters: Developing a model for Complex Non-linear Events, Proc. of International Conference onDisaster Management: Crisis and Opportunity: Hazard Management and Disaster Preparedness in Australasia and thePacific Region. Queensland, Australia. 25-28, 1998.12) McNeil Jr., D.G.: , The NewYork Times, 2012, Available at:http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/10/health/haitian-cholera-epidemic-traced-to-first-known-victim.html?_r=1, AccessedMarch 2012.13) MyWebs: Haiti Earthquake Facts 86, 2011, Available at: http://mywebs.hubpages.com/hub/Haiti-Earthquake-Facts,Accessed March 2012.14) New York Times (NYT): Haiti, 2012. Available at:http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/haiti/index.html?offset=0&s=newest, AccessedFebruary, 201215) Oxfam GB.: Haiti Earthquake Response, Arup Assignment Report, 2010, Available at:http://www.eqclearinghouse.org/20100112-haiti/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/20100522_ARUP_Haiti.pdf, Accessed March2012.16) Timmerman, P.: Vulnerability, resilience and the collapse of society: a review of models and possible climatic applications.Toronto, Institute for Environmental Studies, 1981.17) Trobe, S.L. and Venton, P.: Natural Disaster Risk Reduction. The policy and practice of selected institutional donors.Tearfund Research project. 2003. Available at:http://www.tearfund.org/webdocs/Website/Campaigning/Policy%20and%20research/Natural%20Disaster%20Risk%20Reduction%20research.pdf, Accessed February 2012.18) Turner II, B.L., et al.: A framework for vulnerability analysis in sustainability science, Proc. of the Natural Academy ofScience, USA 100, no. 14, pp.8074-8079, 2003.19) US Army Corps of Engineers, Mobile District and Topographic Engineering Center. Water Resources Assessment of Haiti,1999, Available at:http://www.sam.usace.army.mil/en/wra/Haiti/Haiti%20Water%20Resources%20Assessment%20English.pdf, AccessedMarch 2012.20) Wisner, B., Blaikie, P., Cannon, T., and Davis, I.: isasters. 2nd ed.First published in 1994 by Routledge. London. This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005. Taylor andFrancis. Kindle Edition 200721) Vervaeck, A. and Daniell, J.: Japan Tohoku tsunami and earthquake: The death toll is climbing again! 2011, Available at:http://earthquake-report.com/2011/08/04/japan-tsunami-following-up-the-aftermath-part-16-june/, Accessed March 2012.22) Xinhua.: 708 killed in Chilean earthquake, 2010, Available at:http://www.china.org.cn/world/chilequake/2010-03/01/content_19493303.htm, Accessed March 2012.- 40 -